scholarly journals High-flow nasal cannula for reducing hypoxemic events in patients undergoing bronchoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. e0260716
Author(s):  
Chien-Ling Su ◽  
Ling-Ling Chiang ◽  
Ka-Wai Tam ◽  
Tzu-Tao Chen ◽  
Ming-Chi Hu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Partial Pressure ◽  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula

Background Patients undergoing bronchoscopic procedures may develop hypoxemia and severe complications. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) may prevent hypoxemic events during bronchoscopy. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effectiveness of HFNC in these patients. Methods We conducted a search in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for RCTs published before November 2021. Individual effect sizes were standardized, and a meta-analysis was performed to calculate the pooled effect size using random-effects models. The primary outcome was the incidence of hypoxemic events (oxygen saturation [SpO2] < 90%) during bronchoscopy. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of interrupted bronchoscopy due to desaturation, lowest SpO2 during bronchoscopy, partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), end-tidal CO2 (EtCO2) at the end of bronchoscopy, and the incidence of intubation after the procedure. Results Five trials involving 257 patients were reviewed. The incidence of hypoxemic events was lower in the HFNC group than in the conventional oxygen therapy group (risk ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14–0.42). The lowest SpO2 during the procedure was significantly higher in the HFNC group than in the conventional oxygen therapy group (weighted mean difference [WMD], 7.12; 95% CI, 5.39–8.84). PaO2 at the end of the procedure was significantly higher in the HFNC group than in the conventional oxygen therapy group (WMD, 20.36; 95% CI, 0.30–40.42). The incidence of interrupted bronchoscopy due to desaturation, PaCO2 and EtCO2 at the end of the procedure, and the incidence of intubation after the procedure were not significantly different between groups. Conclusions HFNC may reduce the incidence of hypoxemic events and improve oxygenation in patients undergoing bronchoscopy.

scholarly journals Effect of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy compared with conventional oxygen therapy in postoperative patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e027523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhonghua Lu ◽  
Wei Chang ◽  
Shan-Shan Meng ◽  
Xiwen Zhang ◽  
Jianfeng Xie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Surgical Patients ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Number Of Patients

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) versus conventional oxygen therapy (COT) on the reintubation rate, rate of escalation of respiratory support and clinical outcomes in postextubation adult surgical patients.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of published literature.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Index and Wan fang databases were searched up to August 2018.Eligibility criteriaStudies in postoperative adult surgical patients (≥18 years), receiving HFNC or COT applied immediately after extubation that reported reintubation, escalation of respiratory support, postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) and mortality were eligible for inclusion.Data extraction and synthesisThe following data were extracted from the included studies: first author’s name, year of publication, study population, country of origin, study design, number of patients, patients’ baseline characteristics and outcomes. Associations were evaluated using risk ratio (RR) and 95% CIs.ResultsThis meta-analysis included 10 studies (1327 patients). HFNC significantly reduced the reintubation rate (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.61, p<0.0001) and rate of escalation of respiratory support (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.73, p=0.002) in postextubation surgical patients compared with COT. There were no differences in the incidence of PPCs (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.08, p=0.21) or mortality (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.29, p=0.14).ConclusionHFNC is associated with a significantly lower reintubation rate and rate of escalation of respiratory support compared with COT in postextubation adult surgical patients, but there is no difference in the incidence of PPCs or mortality. More well-designed, large randomised controlled trials are needed to determine the subpopulation of patients who are most likely to benefit from HFNC therapy.

Heated Humidified High-Flow Nasal Cannula for Preterm Infants: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Fleeman ◽  
Yenal Dundar ◽  
Prakesh S Shah ◽  
Ben NJ Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Safe Alternative

AbstractBackgroundHeated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) is gaining popularity as a mode of respiratory support. We updated a systematic review and meta-analyses examining the efficacy and safety of HHHFNC compared with standard treatments for preterm infants. The primary outcome was the need for reintubation for preterm infants following mechanical ventilation (post-extubation analysis) or need for intubation for preterm infants not previously intubated (analysis of primary respiratory support)MethodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of HHHFNC versus standard treatments. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.3.ResultsThe post-extubation analysis included ten RCTs (n = 1,201), and the analysis of primary respiratory support included ten RCTs (n = 1,676). There were no statistically significant differences for outcomes measuring efficacy, including the primary outcome. There were statistically significant differences favoring HHHFNC versus nasal cannula positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for air leak (post-extubation, risk ratio [RR] 0.29, 95 percent confidence interval [CI] 0.11 to 0.76, I2 = 0) and nasal trauma (post-extubation: 0.35, 95 percent CI 0.27 to 0.46, I2 = 5 percent; primary respiratory support: RR 0.52, 95 percent CI 0.37 to 0.74; I2 = 27 percent). Studies, particularly those of primary respiratory support, included very few preterm infants with gestational age (GA) <28 weeks.ConclusionsHHHFNC may offer an efficacious and safe alternative to NCPAP for some infants but evidence is lacking for preterm infants with GA ≤28 weeks.

scholarly journals High-Flow Nasal Cannula in Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Yongkang Huang ◽  
Wei Lei ◽  
Wenyu Zhang ◽  
Jian-an Huang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Intubation Rate ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure

Background. Although the efficacy and safety of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in hypoxemic respiratory failure are widely recognized, it is yet unclear whether HFNC can effectively reduce the intubation rate and mortality in hypercapnic respiratory failure. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficiency of HFNC in these patients. Methods. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) was carried out. Two reviewers independently screened all references according to the inclusion criteria. We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies, respectively. Data from eligible trials were extracted for the meta-analysis. Results. Eight studies with a total of 621 participants were included (six RCTs and two cohort studies). Our analysis showed that HFNC is noninferior to noninvasive ventilation (NIV) with respect to intubation rate in both RCTs (OR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.45–1.88) and cohort studies (OR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.55–1.62). Similarly, the analysis of cohort studies showed no difference in reducing mortality rates (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.42–2.20). Based on RCTs, NIV seemed more effective in reducing mortality (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 0.68–2.60), but the intertreatment difference was not statistically significant. Furthermore, no significant differences were found between HFNC and NIV relating to change of blood gas analysis or respiratory rate (MD = −0.75, 95% CI: −2.6 to 1.09). Likewise, no significant intergroup differences were found with regard to intensive care unit stay (SMD = −0.07, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.11). Due to a physiological friendly interface and variation, HFNC showed a significant advantage over NIV in patients’ comfort and complication of therapy. Conclusion. Despite the limitations noted, HFNC may be an effective and safe alternative to prevent endotracheal intubation and mortality when NIV is unsuitable in mild-to-moderate hypercapnia. Further high-quality studies are needed to validate these findings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document